What's with the Lakers and pinning their hopes on inefficient, chucking guards who plays no defense?
All that hype around Clarkson, how a 2nd round pick made the All Rookie 1st team on one of the most storied franchise in the league, is really just that, hype.
Fact that Clarkson got playing time and "excelled" on the Lakers isn't a function of how good he is, but more a function of how bad the other Laker guards are.
First off, even in raw stats, 12 points and 3.5 assists a game, even on only 25 mpg isn't all that impressive, especially when you are shooting 44.8% from the floor.
Then you look deeper in the stats, and you see:
- 1.6 TOV, which means that for every assists he had, he had a turnover. Not that great of a number
- Then you see 3 pt% of 31.4%. which is a below average 3 pt shooter in today's league. It's impossible for a PG to lead a team anywhere being just an average 3 pt shooter, let alone below average
- TS% of 52.8% isn't all that great for a PG either, even a chucker like Iverson had a lifetime TS% of 51.8%.
- ORTG of 107 and DRTG of 112. Can't really lead your team anywhere if your net rating is -ve.
- VORP of 0.6. Hey, at least it's not negative, but we know that Clarkson is marginally better than an average PG, which is pretty good, even excellent, for a 2nd round pick, but for the future starting PG of a team?